Stop bending over backwards to protect bats, Defra told

Yahoo

02-04-2025

Defra is over-interpreting EU rules on protecting bats that are blocking development, a Government-backed review has found.
A review of environmental regulation commissioned by the Government has recommended that EU-derived legislation be reformed to make building projects easier.
This includes the Habitats Regulation that was the basis of the 1km bat tunnel that added more than £100million to the cost of HS2 in an effort to protect 300 bats in Buckinghamshire.
The review by economist Dan Corry is part of the Government's push to reduce red tape that slows development of housing and infrastructure.
The Government has now said it will consider all of his recommendations, with nine swiftly implemented.
These include giving 'trusted bodies' such as the National Trust the power to bypass regulations for projects such as wetlands, and giving major projects such as Heathrow a single responsible regulator.
The review found there were more than 3,000 pieces of environmental regulation, much of it inherited from the EU.
It said there was a view that EU rules were being more cautiously applied by Defra bodies such as Natural England and the Environment Agency, than in many European countries.
Regulators continue to apply the 'precautionary principle' – insisting on preventative measures even for a small risk of harm –despite it being abolished by UK legislation after Brexit, the review said.
The Government will not consider changing the regulations, but is understood to be looking at how they are applied.
Other regulations that could come under scrutiny include those that resulted in the so-called 'fish disco', underwater speakers to deter marine life, that could delay construction of Hinkley Point C.
A new Defra infrastructure board will also be introduced to speed up delivery of major projects, for example by working with developers at an early stage and ensuring decisions are proportionate.
The Government has already introduced its Planning Bill, which will make it easier for councils to compulsory purchase land to build homes and hospitals, and pay communities near new electricity pylons.
Britain Remade, which campaigns to make the planning system easier for developers to build, welcomed the Government's response to Mr Corry's review.
'For far too long, environmental charities and quangos have been allowed to stand in the way of development, acting as roadblocks to growth by insisting on hugely expensive and project delaying measures like bat tunnels and fish discos,' said Sam Richards, Britain Remade's CEO.
'With these measures, along with changes to the statutory consultee system and the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, hopefully Britain will finally be able to get building.'
Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have been criticised by green groups for dismissing protections for species such as newts and spiders as blockers to growth.
Mr Corry said a streamlined system would be better for nature and long-term economic growth and said the two should not be seen as a zero-sum game, although he acknowledged there would be 'short term trade-offs'.
Richard Benwell, chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link said: 'The Government's planning reforms fall far short of the win-win approach ministers want and Corry seems to support.
'For too long, environmental regulators have been too poor and too weak to enforce the law. Their environmental duties have been too soft and vague to drive environmental recovery.'
A Defra spokesman said: 'The current system is not working for nature or for growth. That's why we will deliver a more streamlined, modern approach to regulation.
'This government will uphold environmental protections, not scrap them. Our reforms will focus on improving how environmental protections are implemented to get Britain building and restore nature at scale.'
By Dan Corry
Our current system of environmental regulation is not working as anyone would want.
While it was set up in good faith, time and factors like resource constraints, legal findings, case law, the UK leaving the European Union and climate change mean it does not deliver well enough for nature or for our long-term economic growth.
That's why we need a new approach to find ways to protect and enhance our natural world, while allowing development to take place. All parties, whether that's housebuilders, nature conservation charities or farmers, need to have a better experience of environmental regulation than they do now.
The current system fails them all.
My review into environmental regulation and regulators at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) – like Natural England and the Environment Agency – focused on guiding activities in the right direction and preventing significant harm, without being antithetical to growth.
Growth and nature should not be seen as in direct conflict – it is not and must not be seen as a zero-sum game, even if short run trade-offs will sometimes need to be made.
This review has made clear to me that our environmental regulation is overly complex, fragmented and difficult to navigate.
Defra oversees over 3,500 pieces of legislation, enforced by various bodies with different approaches.
While comprehensive, the system is bureaucratic and inefficient, with many laws out of date or overlapping, leading to unnecessary red tape.
A shift is needed; from rigid processes to a system that focuses on clear, outcome-driven goals.
To improve the system, my report has put forward 29 recommendations. These are focused on streamlining and modernising regulations that I believe would lead to better outcomes all round.
To name but a few, I recommend the following actions. We need to support better cooperation between regulators and appoint a lead regulator for all major infrastructure projects in which multiple have an interest.
This should be agreed by regulators at the outset of projects, particularly those that represent significant growth and economic potential.
This will stop the endless loop of developers for developers seeking planning approvals from multiple authorities who often disagree with each other – speeding up approvals and potentially saving businesses millions in time and resource.
Furthermore, to accelerate the delivery of significant projects, Defra should establish an Infrastructure Board.
This board should help ensure that regulatory decisions balance costs and proportionality as well as look to the future to see what's needed.
This will improve oversight within the department and overcome barriers to development at an early stage.
Another recommendation which is key is allowing trusted nature conservation and environmental partners and other organisations with good track records greater autonomy for nature-positive projects.
This approach will enable them to move fast on restoring habitats without applying to regulators for multiple permissions, delivering improvement quicker and easier.
Understandably, environmental groups may be nervous about some of the recommendations. And of course, we must not stop being concerned about the wellbeing of our precious nature be that about protected species of bats or rare flora.
But everything I have learned during this review suggests that the current system does not work as well as it could for nature and the environment, let alone for growth.
The temptation to 'always keep a hold of nurse for fear of finding something worse' is natural but is surely not the right approach to be taken to deliver positive change.
Defra needs to up its game and get more on the front foot to execute these recommendations, but I am encouraged by the fact that the department has already begun to implement several of these reforms.
The prize of better protection for the environment with growth is now in reach.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.